Reentry Housing Options for Sex Offenders Center for Sex Offender Management Liz Whitmore, Housing...

Council of State Governments Justice Center | 1

Dr. Kurt Bumby, Senior Associate, Center for Effective Public Policy,

Director, Center for Sex Offender Management

Liz Whitmore, Housing Coordinator, Vermont Department of Corrections

Derek Miodownik, Restorative and Community Justice Executive,

Vermont Department of Corrections

Paul Solomon, Executive Director, Sponsors, Inc., Eugene, Oregon

Lahiz Tavarez, Policy Analyst, Corrections & Reentry, Council of State

Governments Justice Center

Reentry Housing Options for Sex Offenders

© 2016 Council of State Governments Justice Center

Tuesday, April 19, 2016


Housing Challenges for Persons Convicted of Sex Offenses

Overview


Sponsors Inc.


National nonprofit, nonpartisan membership association of state government officials

Represents all three branches of state government

Provides practical advice informed by the best available evidence


The National Reentry Resource Center

• The NRRC is a project of the CSG Justice Center and is supported by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

• NRRC staff have worked with nearly SCA 600 grantees, including 40 state corrections agencies.

• The NRRC provides individualized, intensive, and targeted technical assistance training and distance learning to support SCA grantees.

http://csgjusticecenter.org/nrrc/

Please register for the monthly NRRC newsletter at: http://csgjusticecenter.org/subscribe/

Please share this link with others in

your networks that are interested in reentry!



http://csgjusticecenter.org/subscribe/

http://csgjusticecenter.org/subscribe/



Overview


Sponsors Inc.


Dr. Kurt Bumby, PhD is a Senior Associate with the Center for Effective Public Policy. In this capacity he provides training and technical assistance nationwide to policymakers, administrators, and practitioners across disciplines to support sex offender management, prisoner reentry, and other court-based initiatives. In addition, he authors and coauthors various policy and practice briefs, training curricula, and written resources produced at the Center. Dr. Bumby received his doctoral degree from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. He has had a diverse career in the juvenile justice and adult criminal justice fields, maintaining roles as an administrator, clinician, consultant, and researcher.

About the Presenter


Housing Challenges for Persons

Convicted of Sex Offenses

Dr. Kurt Bumby Senior Associate, Center for Effective Public Policy

Director, Center for Sex Offender Management


• Empirically-grounded assessments to guide case management

• Sound transition and release plans

• Risk-need based interventions

– Institutional and/or community based • Sex offense specific treatment

• Other risk-reducing programs, services

• Balanced, change-promoting supervision strategies

• Accurate monitoring, tracking

Keys to Successful Reentry (and Public Safety) for Individuals Convicted of Sex Offenses


• Research-informed laws, policies

• Victim-responsive policies, strategies

• Social ties, community supports

• Prosocial activities

• Stable, suitable employment

• Stable, suitable, affordable housing

Keys to Successful Reentry (and Public Safety) for Individuals Convicted of Sex Offenses (cont.)


Practitioners' Perceptions of Most Significant Reentry Barriers for Sex Offenders

46%

50%

72%

81%

86%

90%

92%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Registration, notification

Accessing treatment

High number of specialized conditions

Residence restrictions

Negative public sentiment

Securing employment

Finding suitable housing


Strongly agree, 77%

Agree, 19%

Neither disagree nor agree, 4%

Note: No respondents disagreed with

“Finding suitable housing for sex offenders is a significant problem in my jurisdiction.”


More challenging,

92%

Equally challenging, 8%

Note: None of the respondents endorsed “less challenging.”

“Compared to non-sex offenders, how challenging is it for sex offenders to find suitable housing in your jurisdiction?”


• Negative community sentiment

• Limited awareness among various stakeholders about this population and “what works” (and what doesn’t)

• Limited collaboration between and among institutional and community-based stakeholders

• Limited resources – Agency

– Individual

– Housing options

• Non evidence-based laws, policies – Housing exclusion policies that are solely offense-based

– Residence restrictions

Reported Barriers to Housing for Individuals Convicted of Sex Offenses


Public Perceptions about Effectiveness of Various Sex Offender Management Strategies

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Prison

Treatment

Residencerestric ons

Registra on/no fica on

Supervision

GPS/electronicmonitoring

49%

64%

63%

79%

74%

82%

(CSOM, 2010)


• May look good

• May sound good

• May feel good

• May make intuitive sense

• May or may not be effective

Well-Intended Policies Are Not Always Well-Informed


• No evidence of deterrent effect pre- vs. post-implementation of residence restriction laws

– No significant difference in trends for sex crime-related charges or arrests

• No difference in recidivism pre- and post-implementation of residence restriction laws

• No evidence of link between residential/geographical proximity and recidivism

• Evidence of increased risk-related factors

Research on Residence Restrictions and Geographical Proximity: Key Findings

Council of State Governments Justice Center | 18 (Minnesota Department of Corrections, 2003)

Council of State Governments Justice Center | 19 (Colorado Department of Public Safety, Sex Offender Management Board, 2004)


• Extended incarceration because of unsuitable release plans

• Displacement to disadvantaged locations

• “Clustering,” density – Specific residential properties

– Jurisdictions, communities

• Homelessness, transiency

• Inaccurate residence, registry listings

• Covertly residing in prohibited locations

• Tracking, monitoring, enforcement difficulties

• Supervision challenges

Impact of Housing Barriers


• Questions about victim access, protection

• Limited, lack of access to treatment

• Social isolation, lack of community supports

• Reduced opportunities for prosocial activities

• Limited employment opportunities, unstable employment

• Financial hardship

• Increased technical violations

• Potentially increased recidivism risk, decreased public safety

Impact of Housing Barriers (cont.)


30%

70%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Yes

No

“Have you and/or your organization developed promising ideas or strategies to offset housing-related barriers faced by sex offenders in

your jurisdiction?”


Stage of Planning or Implementation with Housing-Related Strategies for Sex Offenders

2%

6%

13%

5%

29%

46%

0% 20% 40% 60%

We have implemented strategies and arecollecting data on impact/effectiveness

We have implemented strategies and arecollecting performance measures

We have begun to implement or haveimplemented strategies

We have initiated formal planning with a goal offull implementation

We have generated good ideas, but have notinitiated formal planning

We do not have any specific ideas or strategiesin place


Yes, 17% No, 83%

“Are you aware of innovative or promising strategies to address housing-related challenges with sex offenders in other jurisdictions?”


• Redeploy existing resources

• Explore transitional housing, shared living arrangements

• Provide housing vouchers, time limited rental assistance

• Reconsider, modify residence restrictions

• Promote education, awareness, engagement – Legislators, lawmakers (federal, state, local)

– Agency managers, practitioners

– The public

– Housing officials

– Other community stakeholders

• Identify, incentivize, support housing providers

• Learn from others about promising strategies

Opportunities to Promote Suitable Housing to Increase Successful Reentry



Overview


Sponsors Inc.


Derek Miodownik has been a professional practitioner in conflict transformation and restorative justice for the past 20 years. Presently, he is the community and restorative justice executive for the Vermont Department of Corrections, where he oversees the state’s extensive network of partnerships with community justice centers and transitional housing providers. During his tenure, Vermont’s Circles of Support and Accountability program has grown into a nationally leading model. Before moving to Vermont, Miodownik was the implementing director of the Red Hook Youth Court, a program of the Red Hook Community Justice Center/Center for Court Innovation in Brooklyn, New York.

Elizabeth Whitmore is a life-long Vermonter, and has been active in the field of housing since she graduated from the University of Vermont in 2004. Liz joined the State of Vermont as a Corrections Housing Coordinator in 2013. Prior to that she provided direct service at the Committee on Temporary Shelter and program administration at the Burlington Housing Authority, with a concentration on subsidized housing for special populations. Liz also served as a volunteer on the Board of Directors of Dismas of Vermont, a statewide organization which provides housing and reconciliation to formerly incarcerated individuals.

About the Presenters

HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH

PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS

FOR SEXUAL OFFENSES

Vermont Department of Corrections, April 2016



2,026 individuals incarcerated

7,863 individuals supervised in the community

850 on conditional reentry/furlough **Based on a June 30, 2015 headcount

Average cost= $62,224 per year of incarceration

Around 150 inmates are held past their minimum sentence due to lack of approved housing, 1/3 of those are serving a sentence for sex crime convictions


Vermont is Unique

Vermont DOC sits within the broader Agency of

Human Services

Vermont operates as a unified department to

manage offenders throughout their terms of custody,

across incarceration and field supervision. Even

while incarcerated, a sentenced inmate has both an

onsite caseworker and an assigned field officer to

coordinate the planning of the individual’s case.

Legislative support for Restorative Justice (RJ policy

enacted in 2000)


Transitional Housing Overview

The Vermont DOC funds approximately 325 transitional housing beds across the state

DOC-funded transitional housing began in 2004 in response to a legislative priority of reducing over crowding in Vermont facilities and the reliance on out of state prison beds

Since then our budget and available beds have grown ten-fold, funded primarily with State general fund dollars

Average cost= $21,900 per year of transitional housing

Programs vary widely in type (congregate houses

vs scattered site apartments), level of structure

and services provided

Target populations Offenders returning to the

community from incarceration, or those

supervised in the community at risk of

reincarceration due to instable housing

Most participants are supervised on

Furlough/Conditional Reentry status

Rental assistance ends on or before the date a

participant “maxes out” of DOC supervision


Community Justice Centers

Municipally-based centers for citizen involvement in addressing the conflict stemming from crime

Provide an array of restorative services

Currently 21 Centers/Programs (municipally based and/or non-profit organizations)

Community Justice Network of Vermont


Circles of Support & Accountability

(CoSA) in Vermont

CoSA is a supervision and restorative reentry

strategy that works with moderate to high-risk

offenders

A CoSA consists of 3-5 trained and supervised

volunteers who enter into structured, voluntary and

mutual relationship with an individual reentering the

community after incarceration

VT DOC provides the financial resources and practice standards through centrally-managed grants, and the referrals through local Probation & Parole offices

CJCs recruit, train and supervise citizen volunteers to legitimize the social contract and ensure compliance with conditions of release (legal contract)

Goal of CoSA NO MORE VICTIMS

58 new core members engaged in FY15


Comparing CoSA vs Non-CoSA

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

CoSA Non-CoSA

Sexual Offenders 10% 32%

Violent Offenders 28% 42%

General Offenders 34% 48%

10%

32%

28%

42%

34%

48%

Reci

div

ism

Comparing Groups

Sexual Offenders Violent Offenders General Offenders


Housing with CoSA

CoSA combined with rental assistance began to take shape around 2010

In FY15, 13 individuals with previous sexual offenses were supported with transitional housing + CoSA

Dr. Kathy Fox (UVM) publishes qualitative research on VT CoSA program (2013). DOC/UVM CoSA recidivism study underway.


Program Highlight #1 (St Albans)

All participants participate in CoSA or Reintegration Circles as well as case management and employment services

Participants begin in a 4 bedroom shared apartment

Weekday staff onsite

Weekly dinner and house meetings

Transition to 1-2 bedroom apartments

Graduate to independent housing with continued case management as needed


Program Highlight #2 (Montpelier)

All participants participate in CoSA

Participants hold their own lease

3-6 months of rental assistance

CJC acts as landlord support and liason, as needed


Why does this work?

Social Capital

Small communities

Strong interconnectedness

Culture of civic engagement

Clear expectations


Contact Information

Derek Miodownik

Community & Restorative Justice Executive


(802)241-0043

[email protected]

Liz Whitmore

Housing Coordinator


(802)241-0063

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





Overview


Sponsors Inc.


Paul Solomon is the executive director of Sponsors, Inc., an organization that has been providing reentry services to people with criminal histories in Eugene, Oregon, since 1973. Solomon was instrumental in the development of Sponsors’ 72-bed, $6 million reentry complex that opened in July 2010, and has spearheaded the organization’s most recent $9 million campaign to build a 54-unit apartment complex for people with criminal histories. He also serves as vice chair of the Lane County Public Safety Coordinating Council and is the chair of Lane County’s Reentry Task Force. He was appointed by Governor Kitzhaber as a citizen member of the Governor’s Reentry Council.

About the Presenter


Homelessness and Halfway Houses: Special Look at Strategies for People Convicted

of Sex Crimes

Paul Solomon Executive Director, Sponsors Inc.


Sponsors History Founded by a group of Catholic Nuns and community activists

in 1973.

Began providing housing services in 1988, with a 5 bed halfway house.

Today the agency manages 15

buildings on 6 sites with a total 150

beds of transitional, long-term, and

permanent housing for people with

criminal histories


Target Population

People releasing from state or county correctional facilities.

Men and Women convicted as adults and assessed as moderate – very high risk.

Priority Populations: People convicted of sex offenses

Seniors (Oregon ranks #1 over 55)

Women with children

Veterans

People with disabilities and mental illness


Risk/Needs/Responsivity

Triaging our resources to the highest risk

Assessments Service Delivery

LS/CMI (Risk Needs Assessment)

URICA (Stage of Change Assessment)

Specialized Assessments

Identifying top criminogenic risk factors

Addressing Responsivity Issues

Aligning system resources to apply dosage

Tracking dosage


Housing Models for People Convicted of Sex Crimes

Transitional Housing

Long-term Housing

Permanent Housing


Transitional Housing – Roosevelt Crossing

Opened 2010 – LIHTC/ARRA/VA $6 Million

47 residential units of housing with 74 beds

62 Beds of transitional housing (60-120 days); 12 beds of long term housing (1 yr) SCA Mentoring Program – (500+ matches)

Reentry Resource Center – Jobs Program

Parenting Inside-Out Curriculum

Moral Reconation Therapy (Evidence Based CBT)

Veterans Grant and Per Diem (transitional)

Legal Clinic

Change Company Journals (skill building) *Approximately 1/3 of Sponsors clients are people with sex offense convictions

and are eligible for all of the programming above.


Roosevelt Crossing – Men’s Transitional Program


Resident rooms (w/full bathroom)


Resident Kitchens


Walk-in Fridge & Freezer


Onsite Parole Office


Honors Building


Fitness/Recreation Center


Administrative Offices and Conference Rooms


Screening Applicants

Reach-ins 6 – 12 months prior to release.

Beds booked through 2028

Referrals: commitment

Individual writes from prison

Release counselor refers

Parole Officer refers

MOU’s with DOC – Monthly reports that include LSCMI score, release date, etc.


Transitional Housing Average stay 60 – 120 days

Clients are required to:

Check in with case manager twice daily

Submit to twice weekly drug tests +randoms

Put a minimum of 50% of earnings on acct.

Engage in programming as determined by risk/needs assessment and case plan.

Working with PCOSO

Not segregated, offenses not disclosed.

Employment considerations

Team Meetings (case mgmt, PO, Tx Provider, et al)


Long Term Housing

10 units of permanent housing for men with sex offense convictions.

Providing residence for sex offenders who have

difficulty acquiring permanent, sustainable housing.

Residents are employed, in school or are on disability and self-finance rents ($350 a month)

One on-site property manager


Zoning/NIMBY Issues Property appropriately zoned vs. process of re-

zoning (public hearings).

Outreach is essential regardless of zoning

Location Priorities: Close to public transportation, social services, P&P

Not in the middle of residential neighborhoods

Outreach should begin ASAP Neighborhood Association Meetings

Door to Door; Mail flyers

Political Support (elected and public safety officials)

Citizen Advisory Committees


The Oaks Partnership between Sponsors and Lane

County’s Housing Authority and Lane County Parole and Probation

Scope – 54 units: One bedroom apartments for ex-offenders; Subsidized Rents; Total project cost: $9,143,982

Funding: Low Income Housing Tax Credits, SDC Waivers, private grants, donations and contributions from local government.


The Oaks – Permanent Housing


The Oaks


Operational Funding Sources

Transitional Housing - $35 a day (per bed)

CCA/JRI Contracts; VA GPD;

SCA Demonstration Project Grant

Long-term Housing (1 FTE - $35K Per yr)

Community Corrections Contract

Permanent Housing (2 FTE - $100K Per yr)

Oregon Justice Reinvestment

LIHTC Pro Forma/LLC

HUD/DOJ Pay For Success NOFA (add’tl FTE)


Making our Community Safer


Q&A


Thank You

The presentation was developed by members of the Council of State Governments Justice Center staff. The statements made

reflect the views of the authors, and should not be considered the official position of the Justice Center, the members of the

Council of State Governments, or the funding agency supporting the work. Citations available for statistics presented in

preceding slides available on CSG Justice Center web site.

Join our distribution list to receive CSG Justice Center project updates!

www.csgjusticecenter.org/subscribe

For more information, contact Maureen Richey ([email protected]) or Lahiz Tavarez ([email protected])

http://eepurl.com/x_f8H



Reentry Housing Options for Sex Offenders Center for Sex Offender Management Liz Whitmore, Housing...

Documents

Transcript of Reentry Housing Options for Sex Offenders Center for Sex Offender Management Liz Whitmore, Housing...